mpc8275@ritcv.UUCP (Mike Capron) (11/21/85)
There are two ways to view (no pun intended) illusions. One is that they directly affect the mind of the viewers. This means that Mind Bar or Mind Blank should protect against illusions. The other question which arises is "Can an illusion affect someone which the caster is unaware of?" For these reasons, illusions in my world merely create an audio-visual-whatever effect. It is the exclusivly the belief of the recipient which allows the effects to work. I do have another spell called 'Mental Illusion' which works the other way. Most everyone agrees that one takes damage from an illusory sword wielded by an illusory fighter if the victim believes that the fighter and weapon are real. A DM could justifiably say, that this is the only case which works and the damage is the result of some form of psychic shock. If the illusionist did not have blood spurt out of wounds, etc., the deception would soon be discovered. There are two other sorts of cases, each with worsening degrees of believablity. The first if this: "Can an illusory cleric, which the recipient believes in, cure wounds on that recipient?" The visual effect of the illusion would be identical to those of a cure spell (wounds closing, etc.). This is justifiable because it is still a personal effect on the recipient. It can be argued against because the some physical matter is being affected, either by the illusion or the recipient. The second case is the proverbial bridge dilemma: "Can a person walk across an illusory bridge he/she/it believes in without falling?" This is harder because gravity is being defied. The only way to justify this one is to say that all living things have some sort of latent psionic ability, which strong belief activates. Note that it is impossible to enable someone to fly with an illusion because the effect would be that person rising off the ground, when he knows he isn't. I allow all these cases, because illusionists would be too wimpy otherwise. Note that members of an illusionists party will probably catch on quickly to the bridge and curing type of illusions and not believe in them, no matter how much they want to. However, I do not allow instantaneous illusions, such as fireballs. I consider that the victim would not have sufficient time to realize what had happened to take damage from it. On the subject of saving throws, I require player characters to state that they are disbelieving. Dragon #43 has an excellent table for determining when NPC's and monsters get a save. Perhaps I will post it after Thanksgiving. Disbelieving does take an attack. What happens is that one pauses to attempt to note discrepencies in the object of disbelief. When a character successfully disbelieves, the illusion does not disappear, the visual effect is still present. For this reason illusions of an empty corridor over something will work very well. The flip side is that someone inside such an illusion can't see out of it. (Hint: This technique combined with ESP or Clairvoyance can make for a nasty ambush.) Well, that's how I do it. Constructive critizism is always appreciated. Mike Capron ritcv!mpc8275
oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster) (11/25/85)
<How many hit points does a line-eater have?>
In the discussion of the "reality" of illusions, I still can't justify one
aspect in my mind. If you accept that an illusionist can cast a bridge over
a chasm, and PCs and NPCs who believe it is there can actually walk across on
the illusion of the bridge, what of the logical inverse of the idea? That is,
if an illusionist casts an illusion over a mountain range, making it appear not
to be there, could I, the unsuspecting dumb fighter-type walk right through it?
It would seem to be consistent, but that, to me, is stretching things a bit.
- Joel ({allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!oyster)rll9466@wucec2.UUCP (Richard L. Lantz) (11/29/85)
In article <1735@uwmacc.UUCP>, oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster) writes: > <How many hit points does a line-eater have?> > > In the discussion of the "reality" of illusions, I still can't justify one > aspect in my mind. If you accept that an illusionist can cast a bridge over > a chasm, and PCs and NPCs who believe it is there can actually walk across on > the illusion of the bridge, what of the logical inverse of the idea? That is, > if an illusionist casts an illusion over a mountain range, making it appear not > to be there, could I, the unsuspecting dumb fighter-type walk right through it? > It would seem to be consistent, but that, to me, is stretching things a bit. > I would assume that to accomplish such a massive illusion would take an Illustionist of a high (skill) level. Not just any 1st level fella could do it.